What you may need to know:
1. It’s the first proper look at Paul Feig’s ill-advised reboot. And it hasn’t gone down well.
2. “I’m not a misogynist, but I play one on TV”. The decision to go with an all-female cast has been heavily criticised since the project was first announced.
3. Now Leslie Jones is getting heat over the fact that her character is the only one of the principal cast that’s not a scientist.
4. Calm down. No one’s childhood is getting raped.
5. Yes, this looks terrible. No, it’s not funny. But it’s probably no worse than the Ghostbusters 3 project that Dan Aykroyd was developing for over a decade. And it won’t change how good the original Ghostbusters is.
6. Broadsheet prognosis: Stinky McStinkeroo. In 3D.
Release Date: July 15.
(Mark writes about film, TV and other stuff at WhyBother.ie)
It doesn’t look terrible, the original films were just as lame in their jokes and set-ups – that’s the joy of them!
+ Murray and Ackroyd
nonsense, Don. Bill Murray had loads of legitimately funny dialogue in the originals. As did Rick Moranis.
They are funny, they are also lame, like dad jokes. Which are fine by me. But that’s my point, the movie is apparently worse now because its women saying them?
How dare you insult “dad” jokes…take that back.
Nonsense that the joy of the movies are Murray and Ackroyd?
Nope
it’s Indiana Jones 4, all over again
Can they not leave the classics alone
see point break 2016
Big, easy money in remakes. Why come up with your own idea when you can just butcher someone else’s which you know people will watch whether you do a decent job or not?
this looks alright, just as silly and low brow as the og, I sense overgrown little boys angst, ease up
I think it might be alright but maybe the trailer is just really badly cut? Hopefully?
Possibly.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=8IDXpOX0Cp0
I think that one went too far in the other direction.
So. Many. Cuts…
Head Of Sony: “Fat women are funny, put a fat woman in it, that way, it’s not sexist and it’s not fattest…. it’s a win-win”
Intern At Sony: “Hey, hey, hey, hey……. I know…… let’s put TWO fat women in it”
Head Of Sony: “It’s a double win-win ! ….make that guy head of Creative Comedic Solutions !”
Messin’ and green goo aside, trailer doesn’t look too bad…. :)
And make the black chick the one who has the sassy street smarts cause, you know, black! Diversity!
It’s the one bit of the trailer that seems like a huge step back compared to the originals. Granted, Winston wasn’t a scientist either (though in either an early draft or some expanded materials he was a former Engineering corp officer who got a degree via the GI bill or some such) but he wasn’t a massive stereotype looking to cash in on the Madea dollar.
It’s quite striking isn’t it? I would have put what’s her name, from Bridesmaids in that role instead, she could do it and it wouldn’t seem so, odd.
I read some interview with him the other day how his character wasn’t in the trailer, wasn’t in the poster and the script was changed once Bill Murray came on board – like from smart black scientist (which is what he signed up to) to a character who just pops up now and then. He was not happy but couldn’t get out of it.
Apart from the two from bridesmaids that are already in it?
Is that all women have to offer the world of comedic film? ‘That bird from bridesmaids’? You’re as bad as hollywood it seems Don.
Yes, because that’s the same…..
“I would have put what’s her name, from Bridesmaids in that role instead,”
Chris O’Dowd?
Even with that downgrade, poor old Winston still managed to apply for the job and demonstrate some sort of qualification to operate a nuclear reactor. I know the trailer doesn’t show everything but we’re clearly meant to think Patty Tolan shows up and becomes a demonstrably unqualified team member through weaponised sass.
Still, I like Holtzmann.
“Obviously one of those women must be a street-smart black lady who says, “Uh uh, hellz no!” At least 3 times per scene.
It looks watchable to be fair.
Like your own urine is drinkable
Bear Grylls says it is so, then so must it be.
Also, would you like this homemade sheep sleeping bag to go with the bottled urine?
Is it sleepable?
‘No one’s childhood is getting raped’
Poor choice of words.
These posts are tired. Picking the latest trailer release from IMDb and writing numbered points is not film criticism. Hope your thesis has more substance.
In this case, a bunch of people online have actually said the new Ghostbusters trailer raped their childhoods.
For example: https://twitter.com/M_Stewarr/status/705445173568868352?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
He wasn’t even born when the first one came out… pfffft!
Its like ‘Bublé sings Sinatra’.
Who cares
Face it wimminz. this looks sh ite.
Obvious marketing exercise is obvious
Was it obvious marketing when it had an all male cast?
No, men are humans, women are special interests.
Well, boring, unfunny special interests.
It’s true, women can’t be funny because we might talk about boobs or periods or childbirth or something a bit, icky, even though they are all rich in comedic (see: painful humiliation) value.
How dare they have a cast reflecting 50% of the population! Now it’s rubbish! Anger! Sneering!
No it was a film with a cast.
Bridesmaids wasn’t obvious marketing. It took a genre , gave it a twist and was geniunely funny.
This is taking something with obvious stock and heavyhandedly crowbarring in the all women thing to make a few bucks.
Remakes are all about obvious stock and heavyhandedly crowbarring things in to make a few bucks.
Here’s an idea…. let’s wait and watch the movie before you completely write it off as being obvious stock and heavyhandedly crowbarring in the all women thing to make a few bucks.
I agree, that is the case with most remakes and this one is no different.
I’ll await your review
Meh
Good or bad, at least it annoys a certain section of society. Even if it’s the funniest film ever made, it won’t beat the hilarious howling of the lads who can’t bear the idea of a film with women – even a fat woman!! – allowed in it in a speaking capacity.
That’s not why people are giving out. It’s women in the role for no reason other than…….. No reason actually. It’s as ridiculous as the black Anne, she white end of. I’d be the same if they made Blade white, he’s black end of. Changing these things to be PC is annoying, changing them for no other reason than funny Women are hot Right now, make ghost busters women is fupping worse. ……il still go see it though
It’s totally why people are giving out about it. A remake of men would have had maybe been criticised for being a remake, this one gets “girls can’t be ghostbusters”, which is a bold-faced lie.
Well maybe for the morons. I personally think people are sick of “reboots”, then to remake something and for no reason change the sex of the main characters. It’s just ridiculous, we get it women can be funny.
The idea that there must be some justification for casting women in the roles, in a remake, no less, because, fine, you remake a film purely for the cash, that can be accepted, but casting women needs a valid artistic rationale, really highlights where we’re at.
BUT WOMEN!! EVERYWHERE NIGEL!!! PC GONE MAD!!!
if it’s bad, it proves women can’t be in films anymore.
And I swear to God, if there is even a hint of a joke about “woman’s business” in there, I am going to trash the CineWorld.
Dón, have you checked out Crazy Ex-Girlfriend? I think you’ll get a kick out of it. Search for The Sexy Getting Ready Song on Youtube for a sample.
@Lorcan – yes! Those are very good!
Pretty much this
Women need to be in roles for reasons, otherwise it has to be men.
The guys wetting their knickers over this are the absolute film highlight of the year. 10/10 would watch again.
Has anybody rewatched the original lately? As films go it wasn’t great. Goofy nonsense.
I saw them over Christmas again. Some more vocal critics would have you believe the Ghostbusters franchise was the greatest gift of film every given to humanity rather than a set of ridiculously over the top 80s comedy films.
You must have had an awful childhood. Ghost busters 1 is a classic, not just 80’s standards.
They are great but they are hardly Citizen Kane are they?
You do know Citizen Kane wasn’t a comedy?
I laughed….
That would be down to your awful childhood.
Also Citizen Kane really……..Really.
it’s not, it’s a silly movie. get over yourself, a classic is Bicycles thieves or the Nights of Cabiria. This is just tripe; og, sequels and reboot.
Ah ok now i see. Your taste in movies good, everyone else Bad. People can argue all they want but ghost busters is a classic. Like some 80’s films, back to the future, rambo, some rocky films ext they might be dated but they are classics for type of movie they are.
SOME Rocky films?
ALL Rocky films except 5, 5 was abysmal.
Yeah, I saw it recently and it’s still funny and charming.
The fact you keep including the sequel in the conversation speaks volumes Don.
“The fact you keep including the sequel in the conversation speaks volumes Don.”
What are you talking about? Volumes of what? People get butt hurt over a remake which is totally designed to be a lazy way to rake in money because it has too many girls in it?
Most sequels are rubbish and just ways to turn a quick buck off the original. Case in point Ghostbusters 2. Noone is saying that it was a classic which you seem to be implying.
People would be writing this off if it was all male, all black , all indian or all dogs. The wimminz like yourself just seem to think that it’s an attack on women everywhere if people dare to think it’s just plain old hollywood buck turning.
It’s “wimminz ” like me who read articles and comments from men complaining about this movie SOLELY because it has women in it, that it should have men only, that it’s now ruined because women. Go and read those and then tell what me what you think that is.
And, if it’s “plain old hollywood buck turning”, why do you care?
@ Rotide I would watch an all dogs cast of Ghostbusters.
@Cup – I think everyone would
The original is a stone cold classic. Classic 80s team comedy, classic New York (pre-sanitisation), golden era Bill Murray, break-out theme music as was the style at the time… The original was fantastic.
http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/ghostbusters-1984
Not enough Gender Fluid characters,,, sorry I am boycotting it!
Who takes over Sigourney Weaver’s roll……? John Candy is dead, so it’s not him.
Breakfast or Chicken Fillet?
…those eggs don’t cook themselves…. oh, wait… they did
There’s a Hot Ripped Guy in it for a few frames, one assumes its him
That’s so sexist, they couldn’t get an ordinary…. tsk, tsk :)
That’s Chris Hemsworth, who’s playing the receptionist.
Leslie Jones is getting grief over playing a shockingly stereotypical, working class, female black character. I thought we had moved beyond that? There was none of that in the original. Dunno why they’ve messed it up in this reboot. Deliberately courting controversy to get more publicity perhaps? Seeing as this movie is a charm free, second rate copy and will hopefully flop and put an end to reboots.
You think that’s bad…. they black faced Zoe Saldana for Nina Simone biopic ‘Nina’
….. Zoe Saldana is black…
….the mind truly boggles what the fupp they were thinking to do that !
It’s funny ’cause it’s soooooo stooopid.
It’s not stupid at all. What your saying is someone can’t be made look darker because they shouldn’t have to look like the person they are playing in the film. I’m white iv friends who are whiter than white I mean pale. Now id have to be made pale to play them in a movie, so what would be wrong with that
But what’s wrong with using make-up to make actors look like people they’re playing? Benedict Cumberbatch had his hair dyed to play Julian Assange, whoever plays Trump in a movie will be made orange.
OK, traditional “black-face” makes us, understandably quizzy, but this is just make-up.
Wait til you see what they did to her in Guardians of the Galaxy.
and avatar.
She must be delighted with non-green face
The issue is that in America where race politics is a hot issue, she’s not black. In other words, she’s not African American. Shes hispanic and even though she’s actually darker than some of the black actresses who would be in the frame to play the part, ‘blacking’ her up is causing all sorts of issues with the type of people who see any dismissal of this ghostbusters remake an attack on women.
She’s not just Hispanic, as per IMDB…. Her father had Dominican ancestry; her mother is Puerto Rican. She also has Haitian and Lebanese ancestry.
Me personally, I think it’s not a biggy… but with all the controversy that these decisions bring up, wouldn’t you think they’d avoid it :)
I’ll put it this way…… no matter how good a job done on the movie, I can’t see the ‘Makeup’ Oscar ever even being considered.
Maybe they wanted to court controversy…… who knows…
My main disagreement is with the car. HOW could they replace Ecto 1 with that yoke? Yes both are Cadillacs but the Eldorado they used had a lot more personality than the square yoke they have now?
Nerds.
Looks great. That cast is fantastic. The VFX are up to par. It’s pretty f*cking awesome to see an action comedy sold on the women. Seeing four fun women blasting ghosts? Sign me up.
Best joke in GBII…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FcyktkVGUBM